This is tea leaves stuff just like Wallace Hall's columns. If the least little negativity is slipping through from the pumpers the winds of change or at least urgency are blowing.

Not trying to re-hash old wounds, but Shaefer was just telling like he believed it to be during the HDN thing. I too thought that HDN should have been run out of town rather than try to marry Gus into that darkness. That was some world class meddling and JFB should have shut that darn down before it got that far. I am sure that Long saw that fiasco and will not tolerate it. I don't think you guys have to worry. Let these guys try to win. Support your team, and don't be a baby back bitch if we win 8 games, because we all know that is what it is going to take for CBB to get 1 more year...

If BB is fired/resigns guarantee in 4 years posters here will want the next coach fired. No doubt in my mind. Wash, rinse, repeat.

This is absurd. HDN was here for 7 years before any significant number of people were calling for his head. Petrino would still be here and his worst season would likely have been 8-5, as opposed to CBB's best. We are very patient with our coaches but it shouldn't look like a clown show in season 5 with all your own recruits. Bielema has blown game after game in puzzling fashion while only pulling maybe one big upset the past two years. In addition, our losses have gone from competitive to absolutely stunning collapse or blowouts. If we hired a new coach and his team improved from year one to year four, I guarantee no one would be calling for his head. Say, if he went 5-7, 8-5, 10-3, 9-4 while looking competitive, competent and with some recruiting success.

This is absurd. HDN was here for 7 years before any significant number of people were calling for his head. Petrino would still be here and his worst season would likely have been 8-5, as opposed to CBB's best. We are very patient with our coaches but it shouldn't look like a clown show in season 5 with all your own recruits. Bielema has blown game after game in puzzling fashion while only pulling maybe one big upset the past two years. In addition, our losses have gone from competitive to absolutely stunning collapse or blowouts. If we hired a new coach and his team improved from year one to year four, I guarantee no one would be calling for his head. Say, if he went 5-7, 8-5, 10-3, 9-4 while looking competitive, competent and with some recruiting success.

The season just started and I believe he HAS improved every year since he got here. We were 2 games from winning 9. Yes, it sucked losing huge leads in those but it happens with lack of depth. Along with winning every bowl game besides last years game. Also, this "looking competitive" is complete nonsense. You either win or lose, you don't get points for keeping it close. But if you want to play that game, who has come closest to beating Bama under Saban? Petrino or BB?

You can throw out 26-27 all day long but, you're being disingenuous by doing that. I'm willing to let the season play out..how bout you?

Well...couple of points.

(1) When we were going 0-8 and 3-9 back in Bret's first season, I said that it should not factor against him THEN. I said that when it would factor in was if we were still struggling after four or five years. Here we are.

(2) The season is going to play out, regardless. This is just message board discussion. I'm not happy now, but the remedy for that is a sure one: win football games. If people want to get fans off Bret's back, have us win seven of our last 10. That'll do it.

(3) The reality is pretty simple - no coach with a mediocre record ever keeps his job for long, despite how upstanding he is, how great a guy he is, how many of his players graduate, etc. At the end of the day, despite all the lip service paid to everything else, the bottom line always comes back to the won/loss record. And close does not count.

(1) When we were going 0-8 and 3-9 back in Bret's first season, I said that it should not factor against him THEN. I said that when it would factor in was if we were still struggling after four or five years. Here we are.

(2) The season is going to play out, regardless. This is just message board discussion. I'm not happy now, but the remedy for that is a sure one: win football games. If people want to get fans off Bret's back, have us win seven of our last 10. That'll do it.

(3) The reality is pretty simple - no coach with a mediocre record ever keeps his job for long, despite how upstanding he is, how great a guy he is, how many of his players graduate, etc. At the end of the day, despite all the lip service paid to everything else, the bottom line always comes back to the won/loss record. And close does not count.

As far as #3 goes the beginning of the thread is full of these mediocre coaches not only keeping their jobs but going on to have successful stints at those same schools. Like I said, if he wins less then 6 this year, I'll join in. But I'll tell you winning 8 won't quiet the majority wanting his head. Things are never as good or as bad as they seem for Arkansas.

(3) The reality is pretty simple - no coach with a mediocre record ever keeps his job for long, despite how upstanding he is, how great a guy he is, how many of his players graduate, etc. At the end of the day, despite all the lip service paid to everything else, the bottom line always comes back to the won/loss record. And close does not count.

If you look around, coaches are being fired for losing THREE games in a year. How many coaches with a National Championship ring have been fired 3-4 years later? I don't have time to think about other schools' level of tolerance.

We are very forgiving. Our leash is long. Most outsiders think Arkansas is probably lucky to get whatever coach we can. But I'm getting the feeling even they are realizing Bret's clock is ticking.

"This is the year, and I think he knows this, that Bret Bielema either proves that he is or isn't the man for this job."

Wilson, Rick is really not going out on a limb there, even by his standards. It just brings up another question of what does he have to do to prove that he is or is not the man for the job? For Rick that might mean 6-6 and compete in every game but LSU and Alabama then play well hopefully win a bowl game. 7-6 with a bowl win is attainable.

In most real high-level Div. 1 football programs this determination is made in year 4. In those real football programs a Head Coach gets 4 years to prove he is or isn't the man for the job.

To those football programs, 5 and 6 year plans are too problematic. It essentially wastes time. In high-level Div. 1 football, wasting time equates to getting left behind.

The best way to solve a problem is to quickly identify the problem, to quickly remove the problem, and to quickly implement a solution. Not the way the UofA Athletic Administration operates, therefore, the 5 and 6 year plan that will waste time and lead to being left behind.

Most D1 programs didn't have their head coach canned and then bring in JLS to tank a season. That season was pretty much a death penalty without a bowl ban or scholarship reduction.

Not trying to re-hash old wounds, but Shaefer was just telling like he believed it to be during the HDN thing. I too thought that HDN should have been run out of town rather than try to marry Gus into that darkness. That was some world class meddling and JFB should have shut that darn down before it got that far. I am sure that Long saw that fiasco and will not tolerate it. I don't think you guys have to worry. Let these guys try to win. Support your team, and don't be a baby back bitch if we win 8 games, because we all know that is what it is going to take for CBB to get 1 more year...

I would be pleased if the Hogs win 8 regular season games but that would mean going 5-3 in SEC play and for a team that has serious problems passing the ball, that might be a tall order

(1) When we were going 0-8 and 3-9 back in Bret's first season, I said that it should not factor against him THEN. I said that when it would factor in was if we were still struggling after four or five years. Here we are.

(2) The season is going to play out, regardless. This is just message board discussion. I'm not happy now, but the remedy for that is a sure one: win football games. If people want to get fans off Bret's back, have us win seven of our last 10. That'll do it.

(3) The reality is pretty simple - no coach with a mediocre record ever keeps his job for long, despite how upstanding he is, how great a guy he is, how many of his players graduate, etc. At the end of the day, despite all the lip service paid to everything else, the bottom line always comes back to the won/loss record. And close does not count.

Just when i thought there was no common sense left on this board, you post this......thanks.

BB must have some pictures of JLong doing something he ought not have or BB's agent is who we need recruiting 4 and 5 star athletes to Fayetteville cause apparently this guy can sell ice to eskimos. How in the heck did JLong agree to that kind of buyout schedule is beyond me.

Razorbacks are 7-20 against ranked teams since Bielema has been the coach, including 6-18 against SEC teams 1-2 against nonconference teams 0-70 outscored in second half. You have to be concerned with these numbers.

The season just started and I believe he HAS improved every year since he got here. We were 2 games from winning 9. Yes, it sucked losing huge leads in those but it happens with lack of depth. Along with winning every bowl game besides last years game. Also, this "looking competitive" is complete nonsense. You either win or lose, you don't get points for keeping it close. But if you want to play that game, who has come closest to beating Bama under Saban? Petrino or BB?

Being competitive in a loss is important.

Yes, in terms of a coach's record, a win is a win and a loss is a loss.

But it's absurd to say that how well a team looks in losing is not relevant.

Arkansas played a Big 12 team that last year had a losing record, and they scored one touchdown on them. And the issues apparent in that game are largely ones that have been festering for a while. For years. Arkansas has struggled in red zone/goal line/short yardage situations for pretty much the entirety of Bielema's time here, and that is not improving. That is significant, and it is directly related to the offensive line woes, which are also significant, which have also persisted for quite sometime. Just like the kicking woes are significant, and those have been around a while, too. Add to that the sudden regression of a very talented senior QB... which is not ALL explained away by young receivers... and that LOSS is certainly worse than it could or should have been.

Had Arkansas lost a good game maybe 28-24, in which they punched in a couple of goal-line touchdowns, in which Austin Allen regained some confidence--in which they just looked PREPARED, like they'd actually been thinking about TCU for at least a good portion of the eight months or so they had to physically and mentally prepare for it--then I don't think you'd see NEAR the concern.

A little bit, yes.

But most of this rumbling is all because of how they LOOKED in losing, in a big game for which they had tons of prep time. How you lose does matter, and it's overly simplistic to say it doesn't.

Razorbacks are 7-20 against ranked teams since Bielema has been the coach, including 6-18 against SEC teams 1-2 against nonconference teams 0-70 outscored in second half. You have to be concerned with these numbers.

But most of this rumbling is all because of how they LOOKED in losing, in a big game for which they had tons of prep time. How you lose does matter, and it's overly simplistic to say it doesn't.

Yep because it can portend things to come. A stinker of a game is either an aberration or a trend. One could argue it's an aberration and we need to wait and see the A&M game to know if it's a trend. One could also argue that the ineptitude in the last halves of the last two games in 2016 were the start of the trend and this past game was a continuance.

Yes, in terms of a coach's record, a win is a win and a loss is a loss.

But it's absurd to say that how well a team looks in losing is not relevant.

Arkansas played a Big 12 team that last year had a losing record, and they scored one touchdown on them. And the issues apparent in that game are largely ones that have been festering for a while. For years. Arkansas has struggled in red zone/goal line/short yardage situations for pretty much the entirety of Bielema's time here, and that is not improving. That is significant, and it is directly related to the offensive line woes, which are also significant, which have also persisted for quite sometime. Just like the kicking woes are significant, and those have been around a while, too. Add to that the sudden regression of a very talented senior QB... which is not ALL explained away by young receivers... and that LOSS is certainly worse than it could or should have been.

Had Arkansas lost a good game maybe 28-24, in which they punched in a couple of goal-line touchdowns, in which Austin Allen regained some confidence--in which they just looked PREPARED, like they'd actually been thinking about TCU for at least a good portion of the eight months or so they had to physically and mentally prepare for it--then I don't think you'd see NEAR the concern.

A little bit, yes.

But most of this rumbling is all because of how they LOOKED in losing, in a big game for which they had tons of prep time. How you lose does matter, and it's overly simplistic to say it doesn't.

If Arkansas had looked like that in losing to Alabama or LSU, it wouldn't have bothered me. Looking like that in losing to TCU, a team they should have beaten, bothers me a great deal.

We begged him to come last time, he and his wife love Ft. Worth, and he has an easier time in the Big 12 than the SEC West.

Yeah, I'd stated at the time he was my first choice... I'd heard, though only rumors, that we made a pretty big offer.. supposedly bigger than Bret's... again just rumor... If you couldn't get him then, don't see it happening now..

Wilson, Rick is really not going out on a limb there, even by his standards. It just brings up another question of what does he have to do to prove that he is or is not the man for the job? For Rick that might mean 6-6 and compete in every game but LSU and Alabama then play well hopefully win a bowl game. 7-6 with a bowl win is attainable.

"Arkansas would have to pay Bielema $15.4 million if he were fired before 2018, $11.7 million before 2019, $7.9 million before 2020 and $4 million in the final year of his contract"

I must have still been thinking of the old contract which was

6.4 million 12/31/17 - second to last year3.2 million 12/31/18 - last year

not sure how he managed such a large increase in the buy out to go with his extension.

This is absolutely blows my mind. If you have a coach that wins only 3 games his first year and goes 7-6 his second year how does that justify an increase in the buyout? I would be okay with the extension and maybe increase in pay.

If the coach has so little confidence in himself to demand an increase in his buyout that would be an alarming signal to me about his capabilities. The big question is did Bret demand the increase or was this just "extra money" Jeff Long was willing to risk to prove a point by making it virtually impossible to fire Bret?

Last 12 games he is 5-7if he has a 12 game season and goes 5-7.....will he be fired?

If he had of showed any fight against Missouri I would not have given up hope for him. Just as is being mentioned here that looking good helps even if you lose......his stupid look on the sidelines is really hurting his chance at keeping the fans on his side

I didn't want to say anything before the game - however I believe our next head coach may have been coaching TCU last weekend.

Haha....put this one in the vault.

We threw everything and the kitchen sink at him last time, and he wanted to stay in the Big 12, Texas's fertile recruiting grounds, and a place where he is heralded and respected.

But it makes PERFECT sense that after beating us, he would change his mind completely and want to come here next season, because that didn't solidify ANY of his reasons for not wanting to come here in the first place. I seem to recall him saying, "There's nothing lacking here to keep us from winning on the biggest stage," or something very close to that effect.

Last 12 games he is 5-7if he has a 12 game season and goes 5-7.....will he be fired?

If he had of showed any fight against Missouri I would not have given up hope for him. Just as is being mentioned here that looking good helps even if you lose......his stupid look on the sidelines is really hurting his chance at keeping the fans on his side

It really is a look of being completely befuddled. I'm wondering what he's thinking by sending a FG kicker out there who was obviously so mentally defeated that I'm surprised he didn't whiff on that second attempt, and the look on his face says, "I think I'm going to have an omelette for breakfast tomorrow...something different."

The season just started and I believe he HAS improved every year since he got here. We were 2 games from winning 9. Yes, it sucked losing huge leads in those but it happens with lack of depth...

Do we have depth, yet? (IOW, there's no excuse for those collapses, especially 2 in a row. There just ain't. And there are bad losses. The last 3 losses were. The last loss to 'Bama wasn't, for example.)

The season just started and I believe he HAS improved every year since he got here. We were 2 games from winning 9. Yes, it sucked losing huge leads in those but it happens with lack of depth. Along with winning every bowl game besides last years game. Also, this "looking competitive" is complete nonsense. You either win or lose, you don't get points for keeping it close. But if you want to play that game, who has come closest to beating Bama under Saban? Petrino or BB?

Who got us a top 5 finish...CBP or CBB? Who would stand a better chance against A&M? Bulima or Peterino. Who lost 56-3 to Gus...Bob or Bert?

Just for verification that it was indeed Rick, before making the comment in the OP he said, "He's 26-27 in the SEC, so it's not like he's lost them all."

Trotting Rick Schaeffer out to deliver the message is the most obvious warning delivered by an Arkansas AD since Frank had Orville give Danny Ford the news in the Demozette after he obviously "lost the team" in that loss to South Carolina in 1997.

Long is going t be walking a tightrope with his comments for a while since it is in his financial interest to not further damage CBB's reputation and market value.

If Arkansas had looked like that in losing to Alabama or LSU, it wouldn't have bothered me. Looking like that in losing to TCU, a team they should have beaten, bothers me a great deal.

What part of TCU being ranked higher and was predicted to win do you not understand? That being said the noncompetitive nature of the game was the issue most have. CBB has had some glaringly bad losses but also some rather good wins. It's the inconsistency that I have some concern about.